Forest Conservation Act amendments: No intention to dilute definition of forest, Centre tells Supreme Court

The Central government on Thursday told the Supreme Court that the recent amendments to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 do not dilute the meaning of "forest" as discussed in a 1996 apex court judgment. [Ashok Kumar Sharma and ors v. Union of India and anr]..In its judgment in the TN Godavarman case, the Supreme Court had directed that forest lands are to be identified by an expert committee, whose reports have to be in the public domain.A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and PS Narasimha was informed by counsel for the Central government that no precipitative action would be taken to enforce the new amendments until guidelines governing the same are notified.The petitioners in the case had sought a stay on the amendments. The matter will next be heard after six weeks."Shri Balbir Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, on instructions, makes a statement that there is no intention to dilute the scope of forest as defined in the judgment of this Court in T.N. Godavarman (supra)....He submits that the guidelines are being finalized and would be notified in a short period...he makes a statement that no percepetative actions will be taken by the Union of India until further orders in respect of the forest, as understood in accordance with the dictionary sense," the order stated..A group of retired civil servants moved the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the recent amendments to the Forest Conservation Act which, among other things, relax provisions prohibiting developmental activities. Allowing megaprojects to come up in the wilderness and forests could disrupt complex ecological systems and threaten the survival of endangered lifeforms, the petitioners submitted.The Court had in October sought the response of the Central government on the matter.The petitioners contended that the amendments significantly reduce the legal protections earlier accorded to vast tracts of forest lands in India.The same will now be exposed to deforestation and irreversible damage, it was argued. Further, due parliamentary procedure and consultation was not followed while enacting the law.It was stressed that human-wildlife conflict will increase as a result of opening forest land for non-forest use. The blanket exemption of protective rules for forest land within 100 km of international borders was also objected to..Senior Advocates Prashanto Chandra Sen and Gopal Sankaranarayanan with Advocates Kaushik Choudhury, Shibani Ghosh, Saksham Garg, Jyotirmoy Chatterjee, Khyati Jain, Akshata Chhabra, Satyajit Sarna, Prashant Padmanabbhan, Rea Mehta, Rahul Kukreja and Vishal Sinha represented the petitioners.Additional Solicitor General Balbir Singh and Advocates Gurmeet Singh Makker, Naman Tandon, Misha Kumar and Suhashini Sen appeared for the Central government..[Read order]